Archive for the ‘False Rape’ Category
Falsely Accused British Footballers Cleared of Rape and Voyeurism
…despite forensic tests on all the players’ phones, only one photograph was found on Barker’s phone.
It showed the sleeping woman with shaving foam spelling out GB on her thigh. Barker was next to her doing a thumbs-up sign and smiling.
Another player, Leon Redwood, said he went into the room at night and sprayed the foam.
Barker and Rodgers said the woman had joined in the “boy’s banter”. She climbed into bed with them and started kissing them.
Dunk and Cook said they were sleeping on the floor and did not get involved with the woman.
The woman was said to have “told a pack of lies” following the incident.
She agreed she lied to police and her employers but said she had been humiliated by the sportsmen.
She complained to police about the players six months later after getting into a volatile relationship with another player, Kazenga LuaLua.
Footballers in the UK are falsely accused almost on a weekly basis. In the vast majority of the cases, they are ‘lucky’ and the lies do not end up completely destroying their lives and careers, although the false accusers are rarely if ever punished. In a minority of cases, they are not so lucky, and are caged, likely to be anally raped and beaten, on the basis of extremely dubious testimony.
Father driven to suicide after false accusation online of paedophilia
The grieving family of a man found hanged in a cemetery claim he was driven to suicide following paedophile accusations on Facebook.
Steven Rudderham, 48, was traumatised when his name, address and photograph were published online, along with a message calling him a ‘dirty perv’ and claiming he was a paedophile.
Within 15 minutes, the message had been shared hundreds of times and the bricklayer from Hull, East Yorkshire, began receiving death threats on Facebook, an inquest heard.
The police are ‘considering’ investigating. When a
false accuserrape victim has her name revealed on Twitter, they conduct dawn raids the next day.
Richard Webster on a Modern Witch-Hunt (2005)
Excerpts from the introduction to ‘The Secret of Bryn Estyn’ (2005) by the deceased journalist Richard Webster. This was a monumental expose of the hysteria and fantasy behind the witch-hunt over allegations of a paedophile sex ring at a North Wales children’s home – allegations now being revivied in the wake of the Jimmy Savile hysteria. (see Steve Moxon on this)
There is a view of history which suggests that as we progress towards civilised rationality, we are less and less likely to fall prey to unreason, or to be gripped by those episodes of collective insanity which have scarred European history. The demonological anti-semitism of the Christian middle-ages or of the great European witch-hunt of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were, according to this perspective, terrible aberrations from the path of progress; they belong to the childhood of humankind rather than to the state of rational maturity we have now reached. Witch-hunts are things that happen in other countries or other eras than our own. We have passed beyond them.
This book is written in the belief that such a view is not only mistaken but dangerous. The history of twentieth-century Europe certainly offers no evidence to support it. Both modern European anti-semitism and Stalin’s purges were marked by collective fantasies in which people identifying themselves as the “pure” sought to persecute or even destroy entire groups of human beings imagined as ‘evil’ or ‘unclean’. These are not the only modern examples of our susceptibility to large scale delusions in which, through a terrible process of psychological projection, we attribute to minorities we have defined as evil or unclean, our own unacknowledged desires and darkest impulses.
The widespread belief, that belonging as we do to a scientific rational age, we are no longer vulnerable to such fantasies, is itself one of the most dangerous of all of our delusions. For it is precisely because of our rationalism, and the difficulty we have of acknowledging our own violence and the full depth and complexity of our sexual imagination, that we are probably more susceptible to dangerous projections than we ever have been.
If we briefly survey the role which has been played in medieval and modern history by collective fantasies, one fact which will almost immediately become apparent is that many of the most powerful historical fantasies involve children and the need to protect them. For although we assume that our own anxieties about the vulnerabilities of innocent children are distinctly modern, this is very far from the case. The notion that there exists an evil conspiracy given to preying on children and causing them harm is an ancient one. One of the many forms it has taken was the accusation of ritual murder traditionally levelled against Jews by Christians in the days leading up to Good Friday. First made in Norwich in 1144, the accusation usually consisted in a baseless claim that a group of Jews had kidnapped a Christian child and tortured or murdered it for ritual purposes. This ‘blood libel’ circled the globe and travelled down the centuries to the time of Hitler, establishing itself as one of the main motifs of Christian and Post-Christian anti-semitism. The sinister conspiracy of child murdering Jews which it conjured up existed only in the imagination, but this did not prevent countless innocent Jewish people from being hunted down and killed in the name of Christian virtue. The notion that Jews were actually in league with the devil, and that they had designs on Christian children, lay at the very heart of medieval demonological anti-semitism – which is one of the most important and least acknowledged elements in the cultural heritage of Christian Europe.
A comparable fantasy, which was to prove just as compelling to the Christian imagination, would eventually emerge. This maintained the existance of a society of witches who flew through the air astride rams, pigs or broomsticks, and gathered together to engage in the orgiastic worship of their master Satan. The members of this evil conspiracy supposedly took particular delight in besmirching that which was holy and destroying innocence. They were sometimes imagined killing and eating young children or babies in sacrificial rituals.
Such fantasies as these do not belong, as we like to believe, to some primitive, archaic mode of thought that we have long since transcended. The more we feel impelled, in our pursuit of civilised rationality, to eclude from our own self-image violent, destructive, or sexually perverse impulses, the more we tend to define such feelings irredeemably external or alien. Projecting feelings we experience as alien is one of the ways in which we attempt to get rid of them. The process of demonising cultural enemies is, in this sense, entirely normal.
It is also dangerous. Whenever we allow any group of human beings to be demonised, the anxieties associated with our dreams of purity throughout history will almost inevitably be brought into play ; we will begin to imagine the group in question in the same terms which are found in other demonological fantasies. They will be seen as members of an evil, highly organized conspiracy intent on infiltrating our national life and harming the very people towards whom our own feelings are most complex and most ambivalent – our children…..
…..How, it might be asked, given the finding of the Tribunal, can the facts of what happened in North Wales still be in dispute? How could an inquiry presided over by a judge ever be held responsible for helping to lay the foundations for a modern witch-hunt?
One way of answering these questions is to point out that, of all the misconceptions about historical witch-hunts, perhaps the most important is that they were driven forward by the common people – that they were based on the untutored instincts of the mob. This is the very opposite of the truth. In historical reality the witch-hunts of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries were the creation of the learned. They were set in motion not by ordinary people but by an educated elite consisting of bishops, ministers, magistrates and judges. These zealous agents of Christian purity pursued those they deemed witches not out of whims or fantasies but on the basis of what they believed to be solemnly attested facts. Historically, indeed, witch-hunts have always relied on judges and magistrates, and on official inquiries, in order to maintain their power and authority.
By turns horrified and fascinated by its vivid sexual content, many of those who were called upon, some three centuries ago to scrutanize evidence of witchcraft, suspended their critical judgement. They unsceptically accepted accounts of crimes that were unlikely or impossible and came to believe unreservedly that they had discovered solid evidence for an evil conspiracy which did not in fact exist. As a result, countless innocent men and women were convicted of offences they had not committed and many were burned alive.
Whenever we allow demonological fantasies to develop in our midst, as we have with in relation to the paedophile ring theory of children’s homes, there is always a danger that the same process of self-delusion may take place all over again. For when, small, zealous groups become seized by this kind of fantasy, they may well, as happened repeatedly throughout history, construct a narrative so powerful that they cannot escape from its grip. There is then a very great danger that they – or the agents of the church or state that they succeed in mobilizing – may begin unwittingly to ‘create’ the very evidence they need to intensify this fantasy.
Because fantasies of this kind are immensely powerful, and because we are all sucseptible to them, it is more than likely that we will fail to recognise what has happened. This danger is particularly acute when a delusion is based upon a palpable reality. For, when fantasy is mixed with fact in unequal proportions, the fantasy can sometimes even become more dangerous and even more destructive.
Stuart Hall’s Victims Demand their Pound of Flesh
Stuart Hall has been accused of trying to stop his child abuse victims from getting compensation by transferring his £1.2million home into his wife’s name.
In February, less than a fortnight after dismissing the sex allegations against him as “pernicious and cruel”, the veteran BBC broadcaster transferred the family home in Wilmslow, Cheshire, to his wife, Hazel.
He changed his plea and admitted indecently assaulting 13 girls as young as nine.
Hall’s lawyer said he was “contrite” and wanted to apologise to his victims, adding that his “disgrace is complete”.
Alan Collins, the solicitor representing some of Hall’s victims, said the 83-year-old former It’s A Knockout presenter’s decision to transfer the property showed “contempt” to the women he sexually abused.
Hall’s victims are planning to sue him. Mr Collins said: “It’s quite a common problem in cases like this, they put an asset in another person’s name or even overseas.
“You would have to make an application to the court to have that transaction set aside. It is a cynical move, it shows contempt for the victims. Yesterday his barrister was saying he is very sorry, but words are cheap.”
Hall’s victims included a 16 year old girl who had her breasts fondled as she was driven home by him (the age of consent was and still is 16 in the UK) and a 13 year old girl he ‘kissed on the lips’.
The Daily Mail, a site with a predominantly female middle-aged readership and that now has links with AVoiceforMen, yesterday featured an article on Hall’s ‘teen victims’*, who were 16 and 17 at the time they were ‘molested’ by Hall. Again, the age of consent was 16 in the Uk half-a-century ago, and it is still 16 today.
Despite this, the Daily Mail stresses that Hall is a self-confessed paedophile for admitting to his crimes. It is likely that he was told by the police and by his lawyers that so many accusers were coming out of the woodwork to sue him millions make accusations that he was certain to be found guilty on the basis of ‘corroborative testimony’ (i.e. that a number of different women were accusing him of being a ‘paedo’) and that the best he could hope for would be to plead guilty to all charges, claim contriteness, and thereby hope to avoid dying in jail waiting in his cell for the next rape or beating.
Until recently, whenever a pensioner was arrested for alleged Nazi war crimes, a discussion would arise in the media as to whether it was fair to prosecute old men for crimes committed so long ago. Could they get a fair trial? Why are we judging them today for actions that took place in a different world? Are they even the same individuals today as they were back then? These people were accused of killing thousands of men, women, and children. Yet in today’s liberal progressive world, men in their 80′s, who have raised millions for children’s charities, and led on the whole blameless lives and brought pleasure to thousands, can be crucified without mercy or pity for being accused of fondling young girls back in the era of ‘free love’. Girls, who now as bitter aging hags, are demanding the bill to be finally paid…with interest included.
*As with Savile, who allegedly abused girls and boys aged from babies to women in their thirties, the media, and especially the Daily Mail chooses to focus on the ‘teen victims’. This is a notable development in the history of paedohysteria, as it used to be the practice for the media to obsess on little girls being murdered by random psychopaths in order to stoke up mob rage and then conflate it with teenage sex in order to push for more ‘anti-paedo’ draconian legislation that protected women in a free sexual market from nubile teenage competition. During the Savile hysteria a little Welsh girl – April Jones – went missing presumed murdered, and yet this was totally overshadowed by stories of Savile the paedophile ‘molesting’ 15 year old groupies in BBC dressing rooms. Similarly, the trial of the man accused of murdering April Jones began this week, the same week as Hall’s trial – almost completely drowned out in the headlines proclaiming Hall as a dirty paedophile for making passes at 16 and 17 year old girls when he was in his 30′s and 40′s. What this shows is that the Sexual Trade Union has now firmly accomplished a key goal in inflating ‘paedophilia’ to include, or even mean primarily, normal heterosexual attraction to teenage girls -even 16 and 17 year old girls – and the pretence of caring about real paeophilia is no longer necessary. Underhand means of exploiting the tragic killings of little girls is no longer needed in order to firmly establish this inflated definition of paedophile in the public’s mind.
The Sexual Trade Union, the NSPCC, the feminist media, and the millions of ordinary women who franchise their power, have no interest in stopping real paedophilia or real little girls from being murdered and raped by real paedophile psychopaths. This is because all they are interested in is raising their own sexual market value through the brutal lynching of men in their 80′s if necessary, for decades old alleged indiscretions with teenage girls. (I must apologise here to woman worshippers for speaking the truth).
Mark Bridger, the man accused of raping and murdering 5 year old April Jones, also propositioned two different adult women the same day he allegedly killed little April. Presumably he is not a paedophile. Not like Stuart Hall.
Steve Moxon – The Insanity Continued: Charging Max Clifford
http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/the-insanity-continued-charging-max.html
With now the ludicrous charging of Max Clifford, we see an even more ultimate insanity of ‘guilt by association’ — if only there was any guilt to associate with: the likelihood (as I’ve explained several times in detail) being no guilt by Savile much beyond being rather a lot of a lad). A police/media witch-hunt trawl was always going to lead to the chief celebrity publicist attracting bogus accusations in the wake of all of the multiple bogus allegations against all sorts of celebrities — most recently, of all people Rolf Harris.
In the usual pattern, even the most recent supposed indecent assault by Max Clifford was nearly three decades ago, allowing the accuser to hide behind the complete impossibility of any evidence gathering. The police case rests entirely on the supposed cross-corroboration of seven complainants when a multiplicity of bogus complainants is exactly what would be expected from a police/media celebrity trawl. It’s surprising that there are ony seven. The police have no excuse for not understanding this standard dynamic.
The police are intent on repeating the fantastic miscarriage of justice that occurred recently in Portgual, following a very similar police/media celebrity trawl re supposed child sex abuse. Here a plethora of complaints about the leader of the main centre-Left political party and the nation’s most famous TV personality led to them both being imprisoned, only to be released four years later when it was finally admitted that there was zero evidence against anyone – just the cross-corroboration of equally fictitious allegations.
This witch-hunt hysteria is what happens when totalitarianism runs riot. What we are witnessing are literally show trials as a result of the ubiquity of the new religion of PC-fascism, which is the endgame of political-Left pique at our collective refusal to ‘rise up’ in their predicted ‘revolution’ of supposed ‘liberation’.
It is revenge against ‘the workers’ that the government-media-education uber-class – the supposed intelligentsia (ha!) – stereotype as men (white, heterosexual males – and boys as well as men).
The more extreme and farcical this unprecedented massive political fraud becomes, the louder will be the enormous crash when inevitably it comes. In the meantime, we should mercilessly take the piss out of all of the fools who make up the ‘political class’ for their monumental gullibility and rank bad faith.
How much further has the idiocy of ‘Yewtree’ left to run? Arresting Steven Hawking? Charging Cliff Richard? Are they going to further trawl re dead people? How about long-dead folk? Winston Churchill? Lloyd George? Oliver Cromwell?
Steve Moxon : Stephen Hawking and Cliff Richard Must be Next in the Yewtree Witch-Hunt!
(As we have seen, life in the UK of 2013 is increasingly so absurd that reality could quickly catch up with satire…)
http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/04/rolf-harris-stephen-hawking-and-cliff.html
Following the arrest of Rolf Harris, Operation Yewtree officers are set to arrest Stephen Hawking and Cliff Richard. It is also understood that Orville, David Attenborough, and Sooty have been separately interviewed under caution.
Police sources indicate that the music recording, Jake the Peg, was a clear admission by Mr Harris that he was in possession of fully arousable male genitals; and it was this which weighed heavily against him when the police/media trawl brought about yet another accusation against a celebrity; all of which police say they are duty-bound to fully investigate no matter how tenuous.
There is a formal denial tonight that Yewtree investigators had interviewed Esther Rantzen on suspicion of indirect sexual harassment in storing photographs of individuals in their late 20s taken some 40 years ago and flashing her teeth at ‘em. This follows rumours of a new Home Office working definition of childhood as extending to age 35, and a revival of the former notion of indecency of exposed ankles.
Cressida Dick, the Met’s assistant commissioner for specialist operations, commented: “Don’t be so fucking stupid. Do you think we’re just taking the piss?”
Steve Moxon : We can always trust DPP Keir Starmer to get it completely wrong
http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/we-can-always-trust-dpp-keir-starmer-to.html
We can always trust Keir Starmer, the Director of Public Prosecutions, to get it completely wrong.
The lessons from police-media trawls of celebrities is that innocent people are libelled and have their lives ruined; not that we should follow the lead of the Met
Police and only listen to putative victims instead of first properly investigating the likely bogus nature of their complaints.
Look what happened in Portugal when the police and media conspired to trawl for supposed child sex abuse victims of the leader of Portugal’s main centre-Left political party and that country’s most prominent TV figure. Both were tried, convicted and imprisoned, but four years later they had to be released after the judiciary were forced to admit that the corroboration of a huge number of complainants added up to precisely nothing.
Mutual corroboration of fiction amounts to fiction, not fact.
In the UK we saw what happened with the BBC and Lord McAlpine. Now we have the witch-hunt against Stuart Hall, following the likely serious injustices perpetrated against tutors at Cheetham’s Music School.
Does Keir Starmer know nothing at all about the psychology of bogus complaint?
Has he not heard of the phenomenon of ‘false memory’?Is he unaware of the research of Professor Keith Soothill regarding the astonishing triviality of the motivation of girls and women to fabricate allegations of sexual assault?
Is he really not au fait with what police specialist rape investigators and his own prosecutors have long said and continue to say about the alarming sky-high incidence of false allegation of rape? [Surely he's not unfamiliar with the study on this by no less a person that Sir Ian Blair?]
Has he not read the new criminological paper on the overall conclusions by his own prosecutors that there is indeed a sky-high incidence of ‘false accounts’ by rape complainants?
I’ll not re-rehearse here my analysis of the absurd witch-hunt against Jimmy Savile – see my earlier blogs posts on this; suffice to say that the test is whether or not someone in Savile’s situation could be innocent; and clearly there is a perfect storm of combination of factors that indeed would lead someone in Savile’s position to be falsely witch-hunted despite being innocent.
The mind boggles how it is that we have such a total idiot as Keir Starmer in charge of prosecutions in this country.
Steve Moxon : The absurdity of the sexless sex scandal
http://stevemoxon.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-absurdity-of-sexless-sex-scandal.html
The absurdity of the sexless sex scandal. Those Lib-Dem ladies were involved as much as was Lord Rennard in business absolutely as usual in the real world of people as sexual beings.
It’s neither possible nor desirable to somehow try to outlaw how people naturally behave – and how others expect them to behave – in their very different ways (and not least their sexual ways) according to their sex. Men form themselves into what are essentially dominance hierarchies, with the high-rankers being sought after by women; who, in trying to get near these individuals, try themselves to ape men in climbing organisations – like the Lib Dem Party. The complication is that women don’t compete for status per se, as men do, because status is a measure only of male attractiveness (mate-value); not of the female (which is simply fertility – youth, shape and looks, pretty much). So women ‘climb’ in whatever way is more their style; like using their sexual charms in subtle – and often not at all subtle – ways.
Picture the Lib-Dem candidate development soiree. It’s not hard to see how rendered ridiculous is the idea that any however mild male sexual behaviour is inadmissible in this or any situation, as if there were no corresponding behaviours by women. Such naïvety is the true sexism.
All those Lib-Dem women won’t have kept their flirtatious ways under wraps; albeit that deployment may be more unconscious than fully witting. They will have felt flattered by corresponding male behaviour from male high-flyers in the Party. But when in stepped the pretty lardy lump that is Chris Rennard, the ladies were not so much for interesting.
Evidently you do need some other confirmation of mate-value than just being the Party swot. Apparently, it’s not OK for the usual low-level sexual interplay to go on if the male isn’t a full suit in the attractiveness stakes; even though otherwise it’s business as usual. In other words, if it’s to female advantage, then usual human life in its ubiquitous sexual aspects is fine; but at moments of women’s choosing this can be rescinded and everybody else has to accept this. [And when does this fickleness ever stop? Not when you're well into penetration if the woman retrospectively questions her consent!]
Now, in this light enter Lord Rennard’s friendly hand finding the odd lady’s knee or back. Anything but the sex of any sex-scandal; a fully public, normally fully exposed appendage everybody had probably grasped and shaken a little earlier. Just part of the usual so low-level it’s nearly-invisible sexual banter on view everywhere. Indeed, it’s likely in part camaraderie – how the lads get on with each other, extended to the gals so as not to patronisingly leave ‘em out.
To what extent was Rennard simply behaving in an expected playful manner by way of reciprocating the signals the ladies were giving off to all and sundry? They might well have been making general unconscious coy come-on signals to the whole room. Men may well feel it ungentlemanly not to acknowledge female projection of presence. And we’re still not as far as anything one-on-one here.
Quite how socially incompetent and misanthropic do you have to be to turn this innocuous scenario into a cauldron of abuse?
Anyway, if the hinted extrapolation of this were in any way true – that the Lib-Dem Party is a casting-couch – then the orangey-yellow totty (and it would have to be this category) who made it to be PPC (prospective parliamentary candidate) or better ….. where are they in all this? If they had to sleep their way to the top, don’t they think we’d want to hear about it?! Can’t think why they’re keeping mum.
Well, OK, I’d guess the issue here would be that the high-flyers the girls were prepared to sleep with were not lardy lumps like Lord Chris. This was natural mutual attraction, you understand; not abuse at all. [Not like Lord Lard's wandering mitts.] What’s wrong with that, the totty would enquire?
Nothing, except having yer cake, eating it and vomiting it back up.
